• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Conservation Biology >Compassionate versus consequentialist conservation
【24h】

Compassionate versus consequentialist conservation

机译：富有同情心的富有同情心的保护

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Ethical treatment of wildlife and consideration of animal welfare have become important themes in conservation, but ethical perspectives on how best to protect wild animals and promote their welfare are diverse. There are advantages to the consequentialist harms ethical framework applied in managing wild herbivores for conservation purposes. To minimize harms while achieving conservation goals, we argue that overabundant wild herbivores should in many cases be managed through consumptive in situ killing. Advantages of this policy are that the negative welfare states imposed on animals last only a short time; remaining animals are not deprived of positive welfare states (e.g., linked to rearing offspring); poor welfare states of animals in overabundant populations are avoided (e.g., starvation); negative welfare impacts on heterospecifics through resource depletion (i.e., competition) are prevented; harvesting meat reduces the number of (agricultural) animals raised to supply meat; and minimal costs maximize funding for other wildlife management and conservation priorities. Alternative ethical approaches to our consequentialist framework include deontology (containing animal rights) and virtue ethics, some of which underpin compassionate conservation. These alternative ethical approaches emphasize the importance of avoiding intentional killing of animals but, if no population reduction occurs, are likely to impose considerable unintentional harms on overabundant wildlife and indirectly harm heterospecifics through ineffective population reduction. If nonlethal control is used, it is likely that overabundant animals would be deprived of positive welfare states and economic costs would be prohibitive. We encourage conservation stakeholders to consider animal-welfare consequentialism as an ethical approach to minimize harms to the animals under their care as well as other animals that policies may affect while at the same time pursuing conservation goals.
机译：野生动物的伦理治疗和动物福利的考虑已成为保护中的重要主题，但道德观点是如何最好地保护野生动物，促进他们的福利是多元化的。后果主义者危害适用于保护野生食草动物的道德框架的优势。为了尽量减少造成危害，同时实现保护目标，我们争辩说，在许多情况下，在许多情况下应该通过消费的原地杀戮管理。本政策的优势是，在动物上施加的负面福利国家持续一小段时间;剩余的动物没有被剥夺积极福利国家（例如，与饲养后代相关）;避免了超持续群体的贫困动物福利国家（例如，饥饿）;通过资源耗尽（即，竞争）对异质抹去的负面福利影响;收获肉减少（农业）动物饲养以供应肉类;最小的成本最大限度地提高了其他野生动物管理和保护优先事项的资金。我们的后果框架的替代道德方法包括外语（含有动物权利）和美德道德，其中一些是富有同情心的保护。这些替代的道德方法强调了避免故意杀害动物的重要性，但如果没有发生人口减少，可能会对过度的野生动物产生相当大的意外危害，并通过无效的人口减少间接伤害异质挑剔。如果使用非致命控制，可能会剥夺积极福利国家的超鲁不多，经济成本将令人望而却步。我们鼓励保护利益攸关方认为，以动物福利相应的表现主义是一种伦理的方法，以尽量减少对他们的护理和其他政策可能影响的其他动物，同时追求节约目标。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号